Template:Did you know nominations/Robert Stephenson (baseball)

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:16, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Robert Stephenson (baseball)

edit

Created/expanded by Muboshgu (talk). Self nom at 03:23, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

The Article is long enough, and has good sources but it needs some help with organization. It seems like the hook was just thrown into the entrance just to be there. I'd like to see the High School, College, and Pro section at least split up and more information in the college section such as some notable games or at least some statistics before I pass this one.--SKATER Is Back 14:18, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
While I appreciate your comments, which can help improve this article from its current Start-class status, it's not within the DYK criteria. As you said, the article is long enough and sourced, there are no rules about organization. In time, I hope to be able to expand on this article, but I'm not sure of a timeframe. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:18, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
I'm still new to reviewing so I'll take your word for it, I'm just going off what I've seen from my reviewed articles. approved, sorry for holding you up.--SKATER Is Back 23:33, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
We were all new reviewers once. I suggest you read WP:DYKR and WP:DYKSG for more info. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:22, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
  • A key part of the hook, "back-to-back", is not mentioned in the first source (after the succeeding paragraph). DYK rules require hook facts to have inline citations. I suggest inserting a citation in the article after the sentence with the phrase "consecutive no-hitters". I would also like to see the two bare refs filled in. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:15, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
  • You're right. I mistakenly thought that the ref I labeled as "ink" contained the hook fact, but it doesn't. The hook I labeled "mlb.com", which does, is now backing up the sentence. Bare refs are also filled in now, I don't know why but toolserver's program is having trouble with newsbank links that I don't remember being troublesome before. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:22, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Reasserting original tick now that source with hook information is cited next to hook fact and bare refs filled in. Thanks for the quick response! BlueMoonset (talk) 15:35, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Thanks for helping improve the article. No reason to let the problems linger, especially as I obsessively check my watch list. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:59, 10 May 2012 (UTC)